Home > PR > Intensify or Downplay: The Hugh Rank Schema for Propaganda

Intensify or Downplay: The Hugh Rank Schema for Propaganda

Intensify or Downplay The Hugh Rank Schema of PR

Intensify and downplay were the two words communication theorist Hugh Rank chose to frame his persuasion schema in his paper circa 1976. His work, as even a cursory search will show you, was aimed at analyzing some pretty serious political communications.

Rank argued that persuasive communications techniques fall into one of two categories — intensify or downplay. A persuasive argument would intensify, or accentuate, positive characteristics while downplaying the less positive. By the same token, a persuasive argument might intensify negative characteristics, for example about the competition, or by downplaying the competition’s positives.

Rank then divided both intensify and downplay into three subparts. Intensify consists of repetition, association and composition, while downplay consists omission, diversion and confusion.

Intensify.

  • Repetition is straightforward. Repetition is straightforward. Repetition is straightforward.
  • Association, only slightly more complex, is identifying with something with which an audience has a (positive) preconceived notion. Obama’s presentation style for example, has often been compared with that of Reagan — the great communicator.
  • COMPOSITION deals with the arrangement of messages in patterns of writing, design, imaging or the combination thereof. Rank uses examples like U$A and Nixxon — the later a derogatory reference to former President. In modern times, LOL might be a more fitting example, IMHO.

Downplay.

  • Omission too is straight-forward, but rather than repeat it, I’d rather leave that part out.
  • Diversion is also simple; it’s the concept of introducing another concept, as in answering the question you wish you were asked.  Sometimes crisis communications experts call this a “bridge.”
  • Confusion is providing answers so convoluted, no one understands what you are saying. In other words, it’s the quotes that make no sense that have the most meaning.

Rank’s theory stands the test of time. If you want to read Rank’s full text, you’ll have to visit a library or some dark corner of the academic web to find a copy; the citation is at the end.

* * *

Rank, H. (1976). Teaching about public persuasion. In D. Dietrich (Ed.), Teaching and Doublespeak. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

If you enjoyed this post, you might also like:
3 Habits of Highly Successful Bloggers B2B Marketing can Borrow [Study] 

Photo credit: Flickr, reihayashic, Persuasion (CC BY-ND 2.0)

You may also like
5 Fundamentals of PR are Still Essential
Amid the Rapid Pace of Change, These 5 Fundamentals of PR are Still Essential
The Message Behind “Do Not Reply” Emails from Businesses
The Real Message Behind “Do Not Reply” Emails from Businesses
Triple 7s the Best Worst and the Most Loved Blog Posts in 2017 [Sword and the Script]
Triple 7s: The Best, Worst and Most Loved Blog Posts in 2017
Writing Labels and Cohorts; Words Really Do Matter
Writing, Labels and Cohorts; Words Really Do Matter [UML]

Never miss out: subscribe by email!

Join thousands of your peers and subscribe to the blog for weekly updates from the blog!




Read previous post:
Are Exclusives still an Effective PR tactic
Are Exclusives still an Effective PR tactic?

The news release went out online in the early morning and I sent pithy pitches with a link to the...

Close